Hudler is the only Wing scoring better than .13 goals who doesn't get better than 14 minutes a game; Hudler does it in under 9. If you adjust Hudler's 8:28 to the aforementioned 14 minutes--meaning he is still seeing less ice than anyone else above that mark--he would be at .31 GPG, better than Datsyuk and in fourth place on the team. At that rate, he would have 15 goals in 48 games (compare with Datsyuk's 15 in 51), and if he had played all 54, that would be 17 goals, good for sole possession of third place on the team.

And that doesn't even take into account that Hudler is the most effective PP scorer we have when you consider time--Multiply by 3.5, and you get 7 goals in 4:05, compared with Holmstrom's team-leading 7 in 4:14, with three extra games, or Zetterberg's 6 in 4:05, with six extra games.

Hudler should be getting at the very least top-nine ice time. As it stands, in even strength ice time per game, Hudler is not even top twelve among forwards, and is only top nine among forwards for PP ice.

The lines should beDatsyuk/Zetterberg/HolmstromHudler/Lang/ClearyFranzen/Filppula/WilliamsMaltby/Draper/Langfeld

When healthy, lines 3 and 4:Kopecky/Filppula/SamuelssonMaltby/Draper/Franzen

Eva, you just don't get it do you? All your if's, but's and nice calculations doesn't mean jack to me. It's nothing but numbers. There's no way of estimating a player's performance by using a certain multiplier to make up for the games or minutes he didn't play. Look at what Heaton just posted. Hudler hasn't looked that impressive when given extra time.

If you wanna make use of your numbers and statistical talents, I suggest you analyze empirical data, like the draft or something.

"Joey (Kocur) has no fear" -Lyndon Byers"Empty-net goals are for homos" -Al Iafrate

"Huds scores more per shift than anyone in the league," coach Mike Babcock said. "He's done a real good job with his minutes. He has the ability to score."..."I try to do my best and prepare for every shift and take advantage of it," said Hudler, who is getting 7-10 shifts a game. "It's about confidence and being ready and having your legs ready for every shift."

Said Babcock: "He gets ice time in practice every day he's learning from good players. As he gets better, he may one day take someone else's job and he'll play more minutes. Now, it's the process of getting better."

I say that this sum's it up, Huds is still a work in progress and he know's that too. Coaching staff know what they have and are taking their time in making sure he become's a better all round player.

Hudler is the only Wing scoring better than .13 goals who doesn't get better than 14 minutes a game; Hudler does it in under 9. If you adjust Hudler's 8:28 to the aforementioned 14 minutes--meaning he is still seeing less ice than anyone else above that mark--he would be at .31 GPG, better than Datsyuk and in fourth place on the team. At that rate, he would have 15 goals in 48 games (compare with Datsyuk's 15 in 51), and if he had played all 54, that would be 17 goals, good for sole possession of third place on the team.

And that doesn't even take into account that Hudler is the most effective PP scorer we have when you consider time--Multiply by 3.5, and you get 7 goals in 4:05, compared with Holmstrom's team-leading 7 in 4:14, with three extra games, or Zetterberg's 6 in 4:05, with six extra games.

Hudler should be getting at the very least top-nine ice time. As it stands, in even strength ice time per game, Hudler is not even top twelve among forwards, and is only top nine among forwards for PP ice.

Math does NOT = hockey. Filling in extra numbers with loose extrapolation does not equal reality. Besides, I would argue that it is not a linear calculation with developing theoretical points that he would earn with additional ice time. I would propose that it is more of a exponential argument. He is extremely productive with the low time that he recieves and that with additional time his production would fall off. I just think there is a fundamental flaw with using linear functions. Using the exponential ideas that I have offered are closer to reality, but make it much harder to calculate.

Oww. My head hurts.

QUOTE

Mickey is one of the only colour commentators I've heard that gets angry when his team gets a powerplay as a result of a crap call from an official.

Basically talking about the same thing we are saying here. Limited ice time and he's still scoring. JUST GIVE THE GUY SOME MORE MINUTES!! He deserves it.

I remember a year or so ago Babs would say that Huds wasn't ready and that he was a liability, that it would take a few more years until he'd be 'ready.' Well, it seems as though he's finally giving the guy credit which is always a good thing. He's seeing what us fans are so maybe he oughta up his ice time.

So a player has no value to this team unless he is a complete force along the boards? That is a very simple way to form a team! Keep the kid around because he can put the puck in the back of the net, and his still has tons of upside. I agree with a previous post that the only way he should be traded is if it is a deal that is too good to pass up, and is nothing but a win for Detroit.

"You're playing worse every day and right now you're playing like the middle of next week." Herb Brooks

Just to get off topic i really think Lang has been a bust, and has anyone been watching maltby play of late i think he is hearing the rumors of DET looking for a grinder that can hit and score i think his hits have gone up in the past two games i have really changed my views on him. He made a few big plays last night. I really think lang can be trade baite what do you all think.

Know what you mean about Maltby. He was playing like the old Malts wasn't he. Good to see.

As for Lang, watching him drives me fricking nuts, but he has shown up in the playoffs and that makes it worthwhile in the end.

Hudler is the only Wing scoring better than .13 goals who doesn't get better than 14 minutes a game; Hudler does it in under 9. If you adjust Hudler's 8:28 to the aforementioned 14 minutes--meaning he is still seeing less ice than anyone else above that mark--he would be at .31 GPG, better than Datsyuk and in fourth place on the team. At that rate, he would have 15 goals in 48 games (compare with Datsyuk's 15 in 51), and if he had played all 54, that would be 17 goals, good for sole possession of third place on the team.

And that doesn't even take into account that Hudler is the most effective PP scorer we have when you consider time--Multiply by 3.5, and you get 7 goals in 4:05, compared with Holmstrom's team-leading 7 in 4:14, with three extra games, or Zetterberg's 6 in 4:05, with six extra games.

Hudler should be getting at the very least top-nine ice time. As it stands, in even strength ice time per game, Hudler is not even top twelve among forwards, and is only top nine among forwards for PP ice.

The lines should beDatsyuk/Zetterberg/HolmstromHudler/Lang/ClearyFranzen/Filppula/WilliamsMaltby/Draper/Langfeld

When healthy, lines 3 and 4:Kopecky/Filppula/SamuelssonMaltby/Draper/Franzen

And boys and girls, we have learned our Algebra lesson today. Now do some homework damn it!

He's cheap, I'll give you that. He's not going to replace Schneider or Lang. Maybe Datsyuk if he leaves, but then there's Filppula, Kopecky, Grigorenko and Bootland. Perhaps McGrath and Emmerton later on. I don't see the big deal, but maybe it's because I'm not satisfied with what we currently have. I'd like Detroit to become a bigger, meaner and more physical team. Hence, status qou and Jiri Hudler doesn't interest me that much.

Plus, I also think Detroit has a shot at advancing further in the postseason this year. Giving Hudler up is a small price to pay to land a gritty, physical goalscorer that could help achieving this. Don't worry though, I got your point.

Bootland is done in this organization. Grigorenko, who knows if he is even coming over. Flip, yes. Kopecky is a completely different skill set. All of these guys are not the same player hence you can't rank them the way you did. McGrath is in the freakin' ECHL right now. Emmerton is quite a few years away.

We would ALL love for Detroit to become a bigger, stronger team. Why don't you guys find us a player who is big and strong and can score and fight, and has a GM who is willing to trade him. Name ONE. And name a guy who we don't have to empty out the tank for.

I get your point, too RB! Please, I am all for getting bigger and stronger but let's be realistic here.

"He sits next to Steve in that locker room for a reason -- because we wanted him to internalize some of those things. Steve was able to will this organization to unbelievable years with the three Stanley Cups, and now it's up to someone else. Z has that kind of will and that work ethic and that passion to be the best. It's going to be his time." -- Coach Mike Babcock

Eva, you just don't get it do you? All your if's, but's and nice calculations doesn't mean jack to me. It's nothing but numbers. There's no way of estimating a player's performance by using a certain multiplier to make up for the games or minutes he didn't play. Look at what Heaton just posted. Hudler hasn't looked that impressive when given extra time.

If you wanna make use of your numbers and statistical talents, I suggest you analyze empirical data, like the draft or something.

Keep in mind, also, that the most offensively gifted player Hudler has played any significant minutes with in any single game is Williams. Even when he's gotten ice time, it hasn't been with the kind of players I've been suggesting--Hudler has been the most offensively talented player on his line almost every time he's taken the ice...Zetterberg is the only other Wing who that could be suggested about. Hudler has the skill to play on the second line and do well. He just needs the opportunity.

"I've never seen a warlock do that without his magic.""I once devoured a monk's soul. It tasted like chocolate."

Bootland is done in this organization. Grigorenko, who knows if he is even coming over. Flip, yes. Kopecky is a completely different skill set. All of these guys are not the same player hence you can't rank them the way you did. McGrath is in the freakin' ECHL right now. Emmerton is quite a few years away.

We would ALL love for Detroit to become a bigger, stronger team. Why don't you guys find us a player who is big and strong and can score and fight, and has a GM who is willing to trade him. Name ONE. And name a guy who we don't have to empty out the tank for.

I get your point, too RB! Please, I am all for getting bigger and stronger but let's be realistic here.

The point was to demonstrate that there are other players that can fill in for those who depart, Hudler isn't our only option. Then there's also the possibility to sign free agents. Some players turn UFA at the age of 27 under the new CBA.

If you want something you pay the price. You can't eat the cookie... There are players available, but you need to give up something in order to get them. That goes for every type of elite player, not just the physical ones. Bertuzzi is definitely available.

Every time we have this discussion it boils down to this, I don't think Hudler is anything special, but you do. I'm willing to trade him, you're not. We're never getting past that.

"Joey (Kocur) has no fear" -Lyndon Byers"Empty-net goals are for homos" -Al Iafrate

I am absolutely willing to trade Hudler. My only condition is there better be an impact player coming back from the other end, and not someone wishy washy who might help us. Trade Hudler for Marian Hossa? Ilya Kovalchuk? Dany Heatley? Sure, add on someone else and maybe a draft pick, make it happen, let's go! Todd Bertuzzi? Hell no. That's why I am saying we should be realistic.

The deciding factor is not if Hudler is special or not. I don't think Hudler is the next Brett Hull, but I don't think he's crap either, and I think he could help the team and contribute points. For some odd reason the general perception is that he's small, so he's useless.

"He sits next to Steve in that locker room for a reason -- because we wanted him to internalize some of those things. Steve was able to will this organization to unbelievable years with the three Stanley Cups, and now it's up to someone else. Z has that kind of will and that work ethic and that passion to be the best. It's going to be his time." -- Coach Mike Babcock

I am absolutely willing to trade Hudler. My only condition is there better be an impact player coming back from the other end, and not someone wishy washy who might help us. Trade Hudler for Marian Hossa? Ilya Kovalchuk? Dany Heatley? Sure, add on someone else and maybe a draft pick, make it happen, let's go! Todd Bertuzzi? Hell no. That's why I am saying we should be realistic.

The deciding factor is not if Hudler is special or not. I don't think Hudler is the next Brett Hull, but I don't think he's crap either, and I think he could help the team and contribute points. For some odd reason the general perception is that he's small, so he's useless.

Neither of those players are available right now as you already know, but more importantly there are no guarantees in trades. Not ever. I'm willing to take a chance on Bertuzzi, because he offers something the Red Wings sorely lack and he could come at a reasonable price compared to similar players. Now, this price includes the risk of Hudler developing into a great player, which is also the Panthers incentive to make this deal.

That's a risk I'm willing to take because in the short run I believe Bertuzzi can make more of a difference than Hudler can, and I don't think Hudler is crucial to our organization in the long run. The reason behind this, is that he is similar to most other players/prospects in terms of style/size. Had the makeup of our team/organization been different, I would probably lobby to trade someone else.

"Joey (Kocur) has no fear" -Lyndon Byers"Empty-net goals are for homos" -Al Iafrate

Didn't see anyone mention it, but even though Hudler is scoring wouldn't the main reason he is still not getting more ice time be that Babcock is not impressed enough with his committment to playing both ends of the ice? No mystery here - you want more time, you have to score AND impress Babcock with your D. I mean, even a hockey player can understand that one. Personally I think Hudler needs this tough coach treatment. Heck, we could all use that in our life! it will help him become a much better player. He has the potential, he just needs to be motivated to bring it all out. Will that be in Detroit or somewhere else? I'd like to see him stay, but if we can trade some skilled center for a gritty winger, he is about the only one with value that we can afford to lose.

Babcock is impressed. He says all the right things, just doesn't dish out the ice time.

"He sits next to Steve in that locker room for a reason -- because we wanted him to internalize some of those things. Steve was able to will this organization to unbelievable years with the three Stanley Cups, and now it's up to someone else. Z has that kind of will and that work ethic and that passion to be the best. It's going to be his time." -- Coach Mike Babcock